My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

Started Apr 5, 2008 | Discussions
petehodbod Regular Member • Posts: 153
My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

I've never taken any flower macros before, so used took the warm weather today to try some with spring flowers. I've also been trying to get my head around F.stops and apertures, so this was a good chance to put what i've been reading to the test.

Most shots were taken at maximum zoom, using Velvia film simulation.

full size
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2354/2390425730_a699b7b31a_o.jpg

full size
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2035/2390423754_afb4a45a18_o.jpg

full size
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2310/2390420080_9ffe216144_o.jpg

full size
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3285/2390412098_403a0b65b9_o.jpg

full size
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2240/2390410124_d3f3f359d4_o.jpg

full size
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2348/2390418080_a8b3033a81_o.jpg

I always like to get a "cinematic" to my images, which means going for the smallest

depth of field possible...but would anyone more experienced say i'm over-doing it?

Magnesus Regular Member • Posts: 250
Re: My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

Most shots were taken at maximum zoom, using Velvia film simulation.

They look oversaturated to me. Is Velvia the reason or does s100fs take so saturated pictures also in other modes?

-- hide signature --
OP petehodbod Regular Member • Posts: 153
Re: My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

They look oversaturated to me. Is Velvia the reason or does s100fs
take so saturated pictures also in other modes?

This is what Velvia does, and is a little like using Vivid colour on a canon compact but (I guess there's a little more too it than that). It increases colour saturation and tone by +2.

Steven Huang Forum Member • Posts: 72
Re: My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

Nice detail on 2nd one!!!

Bert (Apeldoorn) Regular Member • Posts: 355
Re: My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

On the fourth one you focussed on the wrong flower!
Nice pics anyway
Grts Bert

tdkd13 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,410
Re: I was thinking the exact same thing ...

Missed focus horribly on the 4th shot.

Very nice, to the guy who thought they looked oversaturated, thats tulips man, tulips are often VERY saturated, they often look oversaturated in real life even. I live by some of the largest tulip farms in the USA and they are wonderfully colorful flowers. Nice job Pete, these look really good.
Ted

Bert (Apeldoorn) wrote:

On the fourth one you focussed on the wrong flower!
Nice pics anyway
Grts Bert

OP petehodbod Regular Member • Posts: 153
Re: My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

On the fourth one you focussed on the wrong flower!

He he...yeah, I guess.

Was trying to capture the ambiance of our first proper spring day. I guess I should've tried an alternative focus to see what happens.

One of my photography issues i'm trying to overcome right now is where i'm so focused on the next shot, i forget to look at the big picture...or even photos i've already taken to see where they can be improved.

...but perhaps the fact that she IS out of focus adds to the mystery!?

OP petehodbod Regular Member • Posts: 153
One thing i did find...

is it's easy to achieve a very limited depth of field, and completely blows away my old Panasonic FZ30 in this department.

...I guess this is very much down to how the Fuji's lens extends away from the barrel, where on the panny the zoom was fully housed inside the lens enclosure.

Full size
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2274/2391237674_c8e487d571_o.jpg

(Although this fact is probably why my FZ30 survived a trip to egypt with no sand issues whatsoever!!!)

OP petehodbod Regular Member • Posts: 153
Re: I was thinking the exact same thing ...

Missed focus horribly on the 4th shot.

I did manage to catch one other flower tho...so very beautiful, chic, and French in every way possible!

Its a shame the background was blown out, but that's what you get shooting into the sun, close to sunset, with a pool of water behind you

Original
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3135/2390401564_dce816666e_o.jpg

tdkd13 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,410
Re: One thing i did find...

Actually DOF has nothing to do with how the lens achives focus, whether the barrel extends or its all internal has no bearing whatsoever. The factors that determine DOF are sensor size, focal length, distance to the subject and aperture. Where this camera likley betters that Panasonic is sensor size, the Panny's use tiny tiny 1/2.5" sensor which is only 24.5 square millimeters, this Fuji is 58 square millimeters so more than twice the size. Not to beat a dead horse, but it should be noted that an entry level DSLR will have a sensor size of 380 square millimeters so it is about 6 times larger still than the Fuji and 14+ times larger than the Panasonic. You can use this sites depth of field calculator to play around with the numbers and see whats what.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Optical/Depth_of_Field_01.htm
Ted

petehodbod wrote:

is it's easy to achieve a very limited depth of field, and completely
blows away my old Panasonic FZ30 in this department.
...I guess this is very much down to how the Fuji's lens extends away
from the barrel, where on the panny the zoom was fully housed inside
the lens enclosure.

OP petehodbod Regular Member • Posts: 153
Re: One thing i did find...

Thanks for that.

...and I thought I was starting to finally get the hang of aperture after reading up on it on the internet. I was wondering when people define the aperture on their cameras, do you just go by feel, or something more scientific?

tdkd13 wrote:
Actually DOF has nothing to do with how the lens achives focus,
whether the barrel extends or its all internal has no bearing
whatsoever. The factors that determine DOF are sensor size, focal
length, distance to the subject and aperture. Where this camera
likley betters that Panasonic is sensor size, the Panny's use tiny
tiny 1/2.5" sensor which is only 24.5 square millimeters, this Fuji
is 58 square millimeters so more than twice the size. Not to beat a
dead horse, but it should be noted that an entry level DSLR will have
a sensor size of 380 square millimeters so it is about 6 times larger
still than the Fuji and 14+ times larger than the Panasonic. You can
use this sites depth of field calculator to play around with the
numbers and see whats what.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Optical/Depth_of_Field_01.htm
Ted

petehodbod wrote:

is it's easy to achieve a very limited depth of field, and completely
blows away my old Panasonic FZ30 in this department.
...I guess this is very much down to how the Fuji's lens extends away
from the barrel, where on the panny the zoom was fully housed inside
the lens enclosure.

twg
twg Veteran Member • Posts: 4,397
Re: My first flower macros (featuring S100fs)

Bert (Apeldoorn) wrote:

On the fourth one you focussed on the wrong flower!
Nice pics anyway
Grts Bert

Wrong focus on the flower...should be on the girl (just kidding)

Great shots and I like the vivid color :))

-- hide signature --
tdkd13 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,410
Re: One thing i did find...

Yes, aperture has a specific meaning, or more accurately even, aperture size has a specific way to determine that value. Basically each aperture setting (in full stops) is half the size of the one below it. Each time your aperture moves to the next smallest stop, the size of the opening is changed by the square root of two.
It would probably be easier to look here.

The more open your aperture (smaller f number) the shallower the depth of field will be.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Exposure/Aperture_01.htm
Take care, Ted

petehodbod wrote:

Thanks for that.
...and I thought I was starting to finally get the hang of aperture
after reading up on it on the internet. I was wondering when people
define the aperture on their cameras, do you just go by feel, or
something more scientific?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads